ArticleJournal of computational neuroscience2016
Sensory feedback in a bump attractor model of path integration.
Article in Journal of computational neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cognitive swarming in complex environments with attractor dynamics and oscillatory computing.Biological cybernetics · 2020Article
- Spatial synchronization codes from coupled rate-phase neurons.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mammalian spatial navigation systems utilize several different sensory information channels. This information is converted into a neural code that represents the animal's current position in space by engaging place cell, grid cell, and head direction cell networks. In particular, sensory landmark (allothetic) cues can be utilized in concert with an animal's knowledge of its own velocity (idiothetic) cues to generate a more accurate representation of position than path integration provides on its own (Battaglia et al. The Journal of Neuroscience 24(19):4541-4550 (2004)). We develop a computational model that merges path integration with feedback from external sensory cues that provide a reliable representation of spatial position along an annular track. Starting with a continuous bump attractor model, we explore the impact of synaptic spatial asymmetry and heterogeneity, which disrupt the position code of the path integration process. We use asymptotic analysis to reduce the bump attractor model to a single scalar equation whose potential represents the impact of asymmetry and heterogeneity. Such imperfections cause errors to build up when the network performs path integration, but these errors can be corrected by an external control signal representing the effects of sensory cues. We demonstrate that there is an optimal strength and decay rate of the control signal when cues appear either periodically or randomly. A similar analysis is performed when errors in path integration arise from dynamic noise fluctuations. Again, there is an optimal strength and decay of discrete control that minimizes the path integration error.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26754972What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.